Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 06:21:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Doctor Ungabungas on 28/07/2010 06:22:17
Originally by: Zalafas Edited by: Zalafas on 28/07/2010 04:21:44 I'd suspect that if it were as simple as 'just undo the change that caused this', they'd have done that already.
I don't even think they've got that far. It's not a case of 'undoing the change' not working. It's a case of 'we don't know what we did'.
If CCP was serious, they'd debug from an actual live fight or they'd incentivise Sisi testing with a free day of SP or something along those lines. I am really starting to think that CCP are using 'we don't get enough testers' as a smoke screen for the fact they don't know what the hell they're doing.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 06:54:00 -
[62]
The problem with debugging live fights is that it will require to deploy the debugging and data gathering programs on tranquility during live fights, making them worse.
As a result of that half of the people on the losing side will start screaming about CCP intervention on the game, accusing them of helping a side or the other in the attempt to keep the battle alive and to find what is the problem.
We already had a very angry thread about that some month ago.
So if they don't try to find what is the problem during battles on Tranquility you accuse them of not doing enough, but if they try you (or some of your corp/alliance mates) accuse them of favoritism and making the battle worse.
CCP lose in both versions.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 06:57:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Venkul Mul The problem with debugging live fights is that it will require to deploy the debugging and data gathering programs on tranquility during live fights, making them worse.
They can't actually get any worse.
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 07:06:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: CCP Manifest It's clear that more "insider" knowledge is important to the fanbase and inclusion in the progress is as well.
This is the most encouraging thing I have read here in a long time.
Is that because you think it implies there is some progress that hasn't been covered in public news items/devblogs? If there was something to share they would have done so.
Back to square one: To know and not to do is really not to know.
|
picswapper
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 07:20:00 -
[65]
Here is the part that I personally do not get:
-You have hundreds of players reporting that lag has increased by a large amount over the last two expansions
-There does not appear to be a directed effort towards identifying "what did we introduce in those expansions that has made fleet fights of 100 vs 100 impossible, whereas previously they worked rather well"
I'm not going to pretend I know a lot about computing at this scale, but cripes people, basic troubleshooting here...
"the soup was good before we changed the recipe, what ingredients did we add that made the soup taste bad?"
|
Average Jack
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 07:33:00 -
[66]
Originally by: CCP Manifest I can assure you that CCP isn't suddenly thinking we're going to pull the wool over your eyes and say lag is a feature. Sfortunatamente(Italian for major bummer), since we like to trumpet player news like the IC stuff, we Facebook'd it as well, which we shouldn't have done, giving the appearance that we somehow endorse this RP "justification" as our new stand on lag. Lag is an evil terrible monster that we want to strangle and bury. We hates it. HATES IT.
If that were true and you gave two ****s about the lag situation then why didn't you delay the role-out of the patch that re-introduced the terrible lag we have today? Or when you noticed that you (once again) failed dismally, why didn't you at least have the balls to admit it and role-back to pre-dominion code until you got the issues sorted?
The reason is because you don't care about lag, you care about PR-crap, advertisement and ultimately bleed us loyal customers for as much money as you can. And your marking tards think it would be bad for CCPs image to be honest and admit to their mistakes. So instead you close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and humm loudly for 9 months, pretending we're all just morons and our PCs/ISPs just all suck at the same time.
But actually you would have made a much better impression if you were honest and would admit openely that you failed with the patch and need another few months to get it fixed. Yes, there would have been some whining but at least CCP could have proven that they are interested in "excellence". This way it's just one big farce and I feel like you are lying to me, badly. For a company like CCP (with a history of epic failures and constantly letting your paying customers beta test your technically not feasible visions) to even mention the word "excellence" really already shows that you (or at least your marketing tards) are a full of crap.
If you want to correct the situation then you should start by making daily devblogs and committing to freeze your product until it works as advertised. Or you could promote some marketing noob that doesn't know anything except how to sweet-talk to Senior Producer and pretend that EVE is in the best technical state it was for the past years (and release minutes to that effect).
|
Caldrion Dosto
Svea Rike Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 07:59:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Grath Telkin
Originally by: Saelie They use even more resources to make that work okay, then it goes up to 1000v1000.
Hi, you don't get it, we HAD 1000 vs 1000, and the game held up better than it currently does, We HAD the ability to wage the largest wars the game had EVER seen, relatively without problem.
Dominions release in December took that from us.
Originally by: Captain Greeneyes
Originally by: Denidil christ some of you are children.. someone clearly explained in this thread how nearly a quarter of the team is dedicated to trying to fix the lag issue but some of the others are still throwing MASSIVE temper tantrums and accusing CCP of doing nothing?
you know what, if you're going to treat CCP like that while they're trying to fix an EXTREMELY complicated software engineering problem (That you pipesqueek little basement dweller brain couldn't understand the first thing related to it) why the hell should they listen to you?
in short: CCP are spending more than normal-business-hours time on a problem that is extremely difficult to solve. stop acting like an ******* toward them.
they don't have to give up time with their families to try to fix this, but they are.
This.
STFU, everyone. Lag isn't a "Oh, let me take the five minutes or so out of my time to try to finally fix this". it's a problem that has lots of variables, and will -NEVER- be completely solved, due to the very nature of the game.
And to you two, first, no, its unacceptable that the game is this broken, and only 1/4 of the staff is working on it (while the rest work on the dress captain greeneyes will be wearing in station).
Who cares what you wear in station, the game is about ****ing space ships.
Also, It took 1 day to deploy the patch that ruined the game, they could spend a day un****ing patching that to give us our game back in a playable fashion.
Its the fleet finder and loot logging crap, they've been told that, they've admitted its causing problems, WELL OK THEN LETS PULL THAT TILL WE GET IT RIGHT. Sure, 18 months after we can shoot each other after buying a console that we really didn't want, and after captain greeneyes has a nice pretty dress.
Maybe, instead of coding an entirely new game, they could have simply started working on re writing EVE's code so its not a nightmare of outdated nuts and bolts that are all Frankenstiened together.
The game is broken in Empire, the game is broken in lowsec, the Faction Warfare game has been broken SINCE RELEASE, missions are broken, Fleet fights are broken, Sov is broken, 0.0 is overall been homogenized to the point of near comatose death, with ALL OF THAT, is there really a reason to walk in stations?
this is the truth, before Dominion Epic fleet fights was had and did work, after it went to ****, and we the players reported it quite quickly, i think the call for rollback was heard in a week or so after deployment.
It should have been done.
|
Louis deGuerre
Gallente Amicus Morte Shock an Awe
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 10:12:00 -
[68]
This thread has suspiciously high quality for general discussion It seems I wasn't the only one suprised at the newsletter. Appreciate the posting by CCP and ISD in this thread. Join fleet testing on SISI (if you can) if you want the lag to get less horrible. Sol: A microwarp drive? In a battleship? Are you insane? They arenÆt built for this! Clear Skies - The Movie
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 10:31:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas
Originally by: Venkul Mul The problem with debugging live fights is that it will require to deploy the debugging and data gathering programs on tranquility during live fights, making them worse.
They can't actually get any worse.
Perception: To paraphrase what was in that old thread about a battle where the Dev tried to gather data and keep the server up:
"Without the Dev intervention the server would have collapsed and we wouldn't have lost so many ships"
"The Dev tools added lag, we would have won in a normal lag situation."
and so on.
People will whine about the effect of the data gathering tools and the attempted fixes so they should be as "soft" and invisible as possible and CCP will not speak about them when they are used during a battle.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 10:36:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas
Originally by: Venkul Mul The problem with debugging live fights is that it will require to deploy the debugging and data gathering programs on tranquility during live fights, making them worse.
They can't actually get any worse.
Perception: To paraphrase what was in that old thread about a battle where the Dev tried to gather data and keep the server up:
"Without the Dev intervention the server would have collapsed and we wouldn't have lost so many ships"
"The Dev tools added lag, we would have won in a normal lag situation."
and so on.
People will whine about the effect of the data gathering tools and the attempted fixes so they should be as "soft" and invisible as possible and CCP will not speak about them when they are used during a battle.
The fact remains that not fixing the lag is doing far more harm to CCP's reputation than player whining about a few battles.
|
|
Giovanni DalleBandeNere
Two Brothers Mining Corp. R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 10:41:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Giovanni DalleBandeNere on 28/07/2010 10:43:48 Sfortunatamente non c'F trippa per gatti (that's just for italians and the dev if he's italian)
Eve is a great game(thanks to CCP of course), is just that CCP decided to steer to a "new" direction
1. partecipation to stress tests is not a solution, for sure you can't blame people for not takin part to them, someone has already a RL job and uses EVE to have fun 2. to the ones arguin only solution is to cancel subscriptions..well might be a solution, but that way you loose 3. whining is not a solution? true but you can't pretend an whole comunity remains silent if soemthing's wrong
honestly i see no solution , and that's sad, for sure after threads like this: CAOD thread or this DEV BLOG
opening a Vote EVE online thread sounds like CCP really doesn't care about it's customers, actually sounds like they'r "makin fun" of us.
cya
p.s. to spelling ****s..i'm not english so might have filled the above with tons of mistakes
|
Dierdra Vaal
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 10:46:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Bagdon
Originally by: Mynxee
Dare I raise the topic of fleet lag testing on Sisi here?
The experience from Dominion supercap testing on Sisi has taught the 0.0 population that whatever is done on Sisi is a total waste of time and will be ignored.
Because game design testing is the same as technical server testing. Yes.
Oh wait no, I meant to say "Dumbest post in the thread". Yeah that sounds about right.
* * * Director of Education :: EVE University * * * CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 11:14:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Doctor Ungabungas on 28/07/2010 11:14:35
Originally by: Giovanni DalleBandeNere 1. partecipation to stress tests is not a solution, for sure you can't blame people for not takin part to them, someone has already a RL job and uses EVE to have fun
It's worth noting that CCP gets 500+ people to stress tests, but the unplayable lag issue can be replicated with 200 people in an unreinforced lowsec node. What's the holdup fellas?
|
Falung
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 11:41:00 -
[74]
Originally by: CCP Manifest Edited by: CCP Manifest on 27/07/2010 19:40:17
Originally by: Seith Silverstein Because the ISC != CCP. ISC is trying to report on a huge fight that didn't take place because of lag. Since they're an RP organization, they can't say "lag". As such, they mumbo-jumbo'd something about spatial distortion.
Why CCP posted it on their front page is a good question though. Remember, by and large the low-level devs and coders (including people who upload things to the website) want the game to be awesome, and want the players to be happy. It's the idiotic suits upstairs that want you to walk around in stations while 50vs50 fights remain unresolved. Perhaps it's some kind of inter-company propaganda/social commentary? Perhaps everything the ISC prints ends up on the CCP page regardless? Perhaps they're using the same RNG that gives us 100,000 ABs/MWDs for mission loot?
The world may never know.
How is this any different then the EVE Trailers showing formation flying etc?
Seith Silverstein hit it on the head with his first couple sentences. Using RP terms to try not to break immersion.
Even knowing this, I still /facepalmed_epic at this when I read it earlier.
I can assure you that CCP isn't suddenly thinking we're going to pull the wool over your eyes and say lag is a feature. Sfortunatamente(Italian for major bummer), since we like to trumpet player news like the IC stuff, we Facebook'd it as well, which we shouldn't have done, giving the appearance that we somehow endorse this RP "justification" as our new stand on lag. Lag is an evil terrible monster that we want to strangle and bury. We hates it. HATES IT.
To further clarify, RP/IC news gets autopopulated to the front page and in many places around the site. So, because we like "player driven" news to appear there alongside the content RP news, that's how it got there.
|
Scharrie
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:29:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Monkey Saturday
Shut up.
If you had 1/32'nd of a normal chimp's brain capacity you'd already know that no one thinks lag can be cured FOR EVERS and that apocrypha had VERY PLAYABLE fleet fights with MINIMAL lag. There is no excuse for the current lag epidemic.
Go troll somewhere else.
wow.. you're an idiot. i actually work on massively parallel high performance systems (less than 3sec allowed response time on over 100,000 transactions per second) and actually know how difficult it is to track down subtle - but devastating - performance issues.
oh PS: to the person claiming we could have 1k vs 1k fleet battles before Dom: BULL**** the people were bein all "that's insanely great" over fights with less than 800 total pilots in one system it wasn't until after Dom came out that we saw 1k+ in a single engagement, largest engagement I was in was 1600 in one system and we crashed the node. stop being dishonest about Eve's past.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:33:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Scharrie oh PS: to the person claiming we could have 1k vs 1k fleet battles before Dom: BULL**** the people were bein all "that's insanely great" over fights with less than 800 total pilots in one system it wasn't until after Dom came out that we saw 1k+ in a single engagement, largest engagement I was in was 1600 in one system and we crashed the node. stop being dishonest about Eve's past.
The battles over 49- (ie: predominion) often had 1200-1400 people in one system with 'playable' combat. There has never been a 1000 member playable battle under dominion code - There have been a few attempts, but they have all resulted in black screens and entire fleets of supercaps being lost (only to respawn later in system with modules missing).
|
Scharrie
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:41:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Eliax
I just have a hard time believing they can't figure out where the lag is coming from.
that's because - no offense intended - you don't understand how software works. most MMO players don't. that's why good software engineers make lots of money.
but MMOs are some of the most difficult software to develop due to the level of parallelism and performance required - the only comparable systems are google's data warehouses and online transaction processing [OLTP].
Google's data warehouses are simpler though - they have less interdependance they follow an essentially tree-based model. When a request comes in it is broken down into parts by the coordinating server and then distributed between the various data storage/indexing/retrieval nodes - it's index based on some natural key like first letter of primary keyword and groupings of sequential keys are stored on the same node. results come back and are assembled by the coordinating server and returned to the requestor
OLTP follows a hub-and-spoke (star network) based model (with some "Shortcuts" between various sections bypassing certain hubs) A transaction request across an OLTP network flows along the shortest path from Acquirer (entity making the charge) to Issuer (entity that approves/declines the charge - though any stop along the way could choose to intercept and deny). The approval message follows the same path back.
with an MMO - we'll use Eve here since we're talking about eve you have much more.
With Eve you have the gateway nodes - which redirect your connection to the appropriate node that is hosting your system - each node has to be interconnected to coordinate hand-offs. most likely each system "node" may be anywhere from 1 to 8 processors in 1 to 4 physical machines would be my educated guess. Coordinating multiprocessing between different physical systems cooperatively (and in parallel) processing a data set increases the difficulty finding performance bugs several orders of magnitude. You have 20k-30k users connecting to the system all at the same time distributed across all the nodes, all the nodes have to coordinate with the central database (which must be kept in sync for all entities in the world), you then have 1k-2k of them hammering a single node (1-8 CPUs) with thousands of actions which must be verified, executed and their results dispatched to all of the clients that are effected by the update, etc.
and here's the real kicker: multithreaded performance issues often disapear when you build debug builds. because the execution timing is different.
|
TheBlueMonkey
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:44:00 -
[78]
Originally by: GoingOffRoading Its a little odd that people always complain about lag in 500+ vs 500+ fights.
How many multiplayer games support 1000+ players fighting eachother at once in one spot together...
Even FW gets laggy but I don't beat my chest over it.
This? Again? Really? ffs, ok, i'll speak slowly, The reason people are ****ed about 100 vs 100 lagging is becuase in previous itteration of eve we had way way larger fleet fights going with far less crippling lag.
so
eve is the game we want back, not this laggy abomination. --
Nothing is worthless, you may have gotten it for free but it still has an inherent value
|
Denidil
Gallente Rape Pillage and Burn
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:47:00 -
[79]
Scharrie = me btw.. didn't mean to post on my second account.
|
Apollo Gabriel
Domini Lex Talionis Etherium Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 12:51:00 -
[80]
In no other game can you have 1000+ player battles...
so many of us ignore/deal with Eve's terribad warts...
But Eve sells itself as THAT ONE GAME where you can do this type of thing...
and we can't
CCP, you've built a reputation as a company that cares more for its fans than its profits...
you're losing that rep
Best, Apollo CCP Commit to Excellence by September 1st 2010
Don't let the trolls, keep you from your goals. |
|
GateScout
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 13:30:00 -
[81]
"...simple game design change..."
Is there any wonder why CCP ignores (or seems to ignore) these forums? They certainly have more patience that I do for the painfully low signal to noise ratio here.
|
|
CCP Manifest
C C P
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 13:56:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Camios
Originally by: CCP Manifest
There are some really cool suggestions out there on how to change "simple game mechanics" to help address fleet battles--many of which came via forums, Fanfest and the CSM. Of course, none of them are really ever that simple to change or design in a sandbox game, as any change can have a Butterfly Effect. Could mean for some a calm, warm sunny California day. For others it could mean a typhoon halfway around the world.
[...]
I don't know of any IMMEDIATE plans to do any revamps on game design for fleets/blobs, but there is opportunity in the future.
So, you claim that CCP have no plans about game design changes because they would resonate in a butterfly effect of undesirable consequences, and ruin the game for those that live in nullsec.
Woah there pardnuh! You were a bit too eager to read into what I typed there, although I understand that impetus since any changes probably aren't going to come at the timetable you want them to. I said game design for sandboxes are complicated because of the possible butterfly effect of undesirable consequences, not that we don't make plans to change because we're afraid of tipping scales in the wrong direction. We've added sov mechanics and changed them in the past, and there's no ban on doing so in the future. I just don't know of immediate plans to do so.
To attempt to answer your questions in honesty from what I understand as being on the fringes of the dev team.
- What are you waiting before testing some gameplay changes? For the entire nullsec population to move somewhere else?
As with every change of design, it takes slotted development time. As is read from numerous other threads of late, the near future isn't exactly full of "free development time". Development time isn't as easy as coming up with new designs, it requires a whole structure of programming and QA to followup afterwards. So while the ideas expressed in this thread for changing the mechanics may be sound, they do require serious vetting versus the code itself for technical feasibility, the actual coding and then QA and testing on Sisi. When you parse it out, something as major as sov changes SHOULD take a lot of development time to "tweak".
- Do you really think that the situation could actually get worse than this? Does it mean that your game designers have no clue about any possible good changes?
To further what I said above, our game designers probably have some ideas on how they'd like to shift things (I won't speak for them though), but the development time and evaluation period for those changes takes just that... time.
- Have you got the tools, a theory or some simplified mathematical model to evaluate the impact of a change in the sov mechanic? Or it's just based on your game designer insincts? Because it seems that whatever method/tool/theory you are using it didn't work in Dominion.
Hahahahhaa I barely would say I have game designer instincts, unless you include home-brewed pen and paper gamemastering or emailing Noah and Torfi at 4am once I have a "brilliant idea" for the inclusion of NPC caravans in the sov equation. I would guess the EVE game design team certainly has many of those things, but as we've seen it's hard to make any predictable model for how things will work once they are forged in the furnace of the actual EVE population hammering at the systems and trying to break them to their advantage.
Your provocatism has provoked! --CCP Manifest-- |
|
Cailais
Amarr THE ORDAINED
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 14:12:00 -
[83]
Originally by: CCP Manifest
As with every change of design, it takes slotted development time. As is read from numerous other threads of late, the near future isn't exactly full of "free development time".
It's your company. Free some up.
C.
the hydrostatic capsule blog
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 14:18:00 -
[84]
Only 17 more months left before eve gets fix's again! I say ROLL BACK to PRE dominion. Stop the false advertizing in your videos, I mean wtf you showed fleet fights FINISHING.
CCP has had 6+months HALF A YEAR to "fix the lag" CCP MADE! and still has not, but don't worry walking in stations and dust514 is coming ;) I mean hey if you lag with that hooker, thatÆs just getting more time out of your isk right?! Everyone will want more lag!
As to the "what game supports 500vs500." None I know of, eve don't, eve canÆt do 150vs150. What game also sells itself on that?
If you make something not playable, then you need to stop everything else and FIX IT. Don't give us worthless PI. Then cry ôomg we need more people to come work for us for free to help fix the game they pay forö you want people to come to your ruse of mass testing PAY EM.
Or maybe before you kill eve with your fail it is time to sell it off to another company who will give it the attention it really deserves, it is a great copy of earth and beyond but CCP is turning it into shít.
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 14:25:00 -
[85]
Originally by: CCP Manifest but as we've seen it's hard to make any predictable model for how things will work once they are forged in the furnace of the actual EVE population hammering at the systems and trying to break them to their advantage. Your provocatism has provoked!
See players you are the problem RIGHT FROM CCP. It aint CCP's fault it's US players. GOD stop trying to break the servers by fighting (and you know wanting to win) and just mine. That mercoxit is so pretty don't you just want to eat it all up! Haha and you might want to SHUT UP and stop trying to provoke your PAYING customers. Just an idea you know.
|
Batolemaeus
Caldari Money Liberation Services Corp
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 14:31:00 -
[86]
Originally by: CCP Manifest I would guess the EVE game design team certainly has many of those things, but as we've seen it's hard to make any predictable model for how things will work once they are forged in the furnace of the actual EVE population hammering at the systems and trying to break them to their advantage.
I'd agree with you if the system was brand new, e.g. w-space mechanics. Maybe someone didn't notice that extreme mineral compression combined with high values of highmins dropped from rats in the drone regions would crash the market. While really annoying, and inexcusable that there was no follow up, such a blunder can be made.
However, especially the supercapital changes and the "new" sov system were not brand new. Both changes built on already existing problems and reinforced them further. You can not explain those with the butterfly effect but only gross misunderstanding of the game itself.
When the sov system hit sisi, people mistook it for a mere placeholder because it looked like a parody of the "old" one. Imagine my surprise when i learned that this mess was supposed to go live. If I still had access to my old corp/alliance's forums where we discussed the dominion expansion before launch, I could post you a thread of a dozen people coming to the conclusion that the system was far, far worse than the pos grind, even without taking into account the lag that would make everything even more painful, since that was the one thing we couldn't predict.
|
Darriele
Minmatar THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 15:21:00 -
[87]
oh boy |
Wizzkidy
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 15:41:00 -
[88]
Who in their right mind within CCP thought it would be a good idea to add a billion new things to EVE when a 100 v 100 fleet fight turns to a sloppy mess!
I really do think you need to pull some resources into fixing the things that make the game one of a kind.
Going down the route of WiS and other stuff that doesn't improve performance in areas that REALLY need it is a stupid business move thats just a fact.
It seems to me that CCP think that adding new content to an otherwise broken game will bring in more subs, which is probably true from the start but just wait in the long run your lose more subs than gain I can tell you that right away.
Your model needs to change and if it doesn't you WILL suffer because of it.
|
|
CCP Manifest
C C P
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 15:49:00 -
[89]
Originally by: alittlebirdy
Originally by: CCP Manifest but as we've seen it's hard to make any predictable model for how things will work once they are forged in the furnace of the actual EVE population hammering at the systems and trying to break them to their advantage. Your provocatism has provoked!
See players you are the problem RIGHT FROM CCP. It aint CCP's fault it's US players. GOD stop trying to break the servers by fighting (and you know wanting to win) and just mine. That mercoxit is so pretty don't you just want to eat it all up! Haha and you might want to SHUT UP and stop trying to provoke your PAYING customers. Just an idea you know.
I'm certain I didn't say this.
In fact, I said this earlier in this thread. Our game design (open sandbox) means that players will naturally group together--whether for safety in numbers, the fact that they like eachother, a desire to inhabit a place that feels "populated", for economic purposes (Jita) or because they like to have fleet fights--even if you incentivize them not to on multiple game design levels. This is not a problem nor are players a problem. This is pilots doing what they should be doing in an open sandbox game. The burden is on us to deal with that phenomenon as best we can via technology, game design and software. Other games obviously get around this by limiting the amount of people in instances (WoW) or spawning another zone when the population gets too high (City of Heroes).
It's almost impossible to reproduce Tranquility in a test environment because of player behavior being so random while taking advantages of the freedom of movement and many game systems in EVE. That is all I was saying. So, our "Final Exam" for any design or code can't truly happen till it goes live. The developers try to do as much testing as possible before doing so and do have some mechanisms in place to test changes that simulate such a large environment--but it can never truly mirror the direction of use or frequency of use the players will engage the designs with on TQ.
--CCP Manifest-- |
|
Richard Christy
|
Posted - 2010.07.28 15:49:00 -
[90]
lol
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |